Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Jermon Bushrod visiting the Panthers


WarPanthers89

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Hey, I'm not going to complain one bit about building that OL through FA and focusing on the D in the draft. That's playing to the strengths of this draft class.

Maybe there actually is something to this Hurney 2.0...

IMG_20190313_175515.jpg.2399a135f19b12d52353282f004e7495.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Hey, I'm not going to complain one bit about building that OL through FA and focusing on the D in the draft. That's playing to the strengths of this draft class.

Maybe there actually is something to this Hurney 2.0...

I won't either, but damn we sure are talking to a lot of old guys for a team that's supposed to be getting younger.

So far, letting go of Thomas Davis and Mike Adams seem to be the only moves  consistent with that methodology.

If that's not our emphasis, why let go of Davis?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Hey, I'm not going to complain one bit about building that OL through FA and focusing on the D in the draft. That's playing to the strengths of this draft class.

Maybe there actually is something to this Hurney 2.0...

That being said, if he is the real deal (even with the "short" arms), I'd probably be pursing my lips, kind of shaking my head imperceptibly and staring with consternation if Jonah Williams is there and Hurney passes on him. 

Honesty, I'd just rather him not be there than for Hurney to pass on him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

I won't either, but damn we sure are talking to a lot of old guys for a team that's supposed to be getting younger.

So far, letting go of Thomas Davis and Mike Adams seem to be the only moves  consistent with that methodology.

If that's not our emphasis, why let go of Davis?

That's easy. We have talent at the position that we perceive would be better than Davis at this advanced point in his career, but our O-line is a lot more shaky. Moreover, there aren't perceived young, talented O-lineman just falling off trees, and decent O-lineman are probably harder to identify, especially if they don't have much professional experience and tape. I would also argue that linebackers and defensive backs naturally have a little more support by their mates in the defensive backfield, so shaky play may be able to be better "absorbed" than that of an O-lineman. Lastly, a premium has been put on protecting Cam, so the more solid that we can get along the line (including depth), the better. Bushrod would be the classic Band-Aid at a position of need, and likely a cheaper one at that.

On on off note, you've been writing off Davis for at least the past couple of years, so now that it's happened, you should be great with it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/16/2019 at 9:02 AM, Mr. Scot said:

I won't either, but damn we sure are talking to a lot of old guys for a team that's supposed to be getting younger.

So far, letting go of Thomas Davis and Mike Adams seem to be the only moves  consistent with that methodology.

If that's not our emphasis, why let go of Davis?

This is rather simple.

Old guys who have shown they can play are cheaper than young guys who can play. You want a reasonable priced player who can help while you draft the future then the older guys are worth looking at. This is one thing Gettleman got right early on then seemed to forget.

Davis was a free agent who said it was his last year then changed his mind. 

I never heard anything about a youth movement for our OL depth. That seems to be inferred by you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...